10
anti-snap stance is anti-consumer (lemdro.id)
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by to c/linux@lemmy.ml
58 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The title is a quote from Mastodon. I’ve always seen dislike towards snap so I was taken back when I saw this stance. The person who wrote this was referring to Tuxedo Laptops.

What are your thoughts on this?

EDIT:

Here’s the original comment: https://mastodon.social/@popey/112591863166141029

EDIT 2:

Some clarification for those accusing me of not following the thread or being disingenuous.

Didn't bother to follow the thread?

https://mastodon.social/@popey/112593520847827981

I posted my question here before this particular response from the OP. I asked the question on Lemmy out of interest and wanting to get a wider perspective. I also engaged with the OP on the thread so that I can get their perspective on their stance.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

because the UX of using a sandboxed CLI app sucks

I think it is more because of this issue because as far as I know snaps have some level of sandbox and you can still use CLI apps as you said.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Very interesting read, thanks for the link. This seems like a major shortcoming of flatpak!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    Yeah that's solidly it. I use strictly confined CLI snaps all the time. (In fact, I maintain the snaps for a couple of CLI apps.) They work fine as long as the snap has the right plugs.

    But I don't want to have to run flatpak run dev.htop.htop to get to htop.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent